Re: Instr()
- From: dpb <none@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 23:26:55 -0500
Michael C wrote:
"dpb" <none@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:f9b8on$dal$1@xxxxxxxxxxxIn the end, it's pretty much a tempest in a teapot, but there is no doubt the use of "API" for intrinsics and standard library routines is well out of the stream of ordinary nomenclature. The only reason for being somewhat persnickety in this regard is that communication is eased significantly if consistent terminology is employed. Otherwise, confusion reigneth even more than normal... :(
Do you have *any* information that shows API exludes inbuilt functions? Why are inbuilt functions any different from any other API?
_Because_ they _are_ builtin -- that's what "intrinsic" means (and in this case "standardese" matches common usage)...
Do you have *any* information that shows that API includes intrinsic functions (for those languages with the concept)?
--
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Instr()
- From: Michael C
- Re: Instr()
- References:
- Instr()
- From: Jack
- Re: Instr()
- From: Mike Williams
- Re: Instr()
- From: Michael C
- Re: Instr()
- From: Mike Williams
- Re: Instr()
- From: Michael C
- Re: Instr()
- From: Mike Williams
- Re: Instr()
- From: Michael C
- Re: Instr()
- From: Mike Williams
- Re: Instr()
- From: Michael C
- Re: Instr()
- From: dpb
- Re: Instr()
- From: Michael C
- Re: Instr()
- From: dpb
- Re: Instr()
- From: dpb
- Re: Instr()
- From: Michael C
- Instr()
- Prev by Date: Re: Rendering Problem
- Next by Date: Re: Instr()
- Previous by thread: Re: Instr()
- Next by thread: Re: Instr()
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|